Our daughter Shelly is an avid reader. You have no idea. We have had to discipline her for reading too much. “If you don’t put the book down, we will take it away!”
Satisfying this appetite is hard work; my wife Kay searches out new authors all the time, and we probably put a strain on our local public library system. The results are hit or miss:
Kay: “So these didn’t work. I guess we can scratch Christian fantasy.”
Shelly: “Is that what was wrong with it!”
Me: “What do you mean?”
Shelly: “They didn’t blow stuff up or anything.”
Kay: “The problem is these authors let their religion interfere with their storytelling.”
There is a fine line between a “Christian artist” and an “artist (who happens to be Christian).” Where is that line? What leads you to use one term or the other when describing someone? Is it just a matter of talent? Perhaps, but aren’t there examples of good and bad art in both categories?
Is it more a matter of intent of what the art expresses? That’s also a bit slippery, because the phrase “happens to be a Christian” almost makes it sound like the artist’s faith is peripheral to them, which is not at all what I mean. Perhaps I am drawing the wrong dichotomy in the first place.
I don’t quite know how to put this, but does the difference lie in a deeper attitude toward art itself: Are they willing to take risks?
I would love to hear your thoughts on this.